The Telecom Digest for July 27, 2010
Volume 29 : Issue 202 : "text" Format
Messages in this Issue:
====== 28 years of TELECOM Digest -- Founded August 21, 1981 ======
Telecom and VOIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) Digest for the
Internet. All contents here are copyrighted by Patrick Townson and
the individual writers/correspondents. Articles may be used in other
journals or newsgroups, provided the writer's name and the Digest are
included in the fair use quote. By using -any name or email address-
included herein for -any- reason other than responding to an article
herein, you agree to pay a hundred dollars to the recipients of the
email.
===========================
Addresses herein are not to be added to any mailing list, nor to be
sold or given away without explicit written consent. Chain letters,
viruses, porn, spam, and miscellaneous junk are definitely unwelcome.
We must fight spam for the same reason we fight crime: not because we
are naive enough to believe that we will ever stamp it out, but because
we do not want the kind of world that results when no one stands
against crime. Geoffrey Welsh
===========================
See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details
and the name of our lawyer, and other stuff of interest.
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:27:37 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: WPA2 vulnerability found
Message-ID: <i2ivb9$4l1$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Telecom Digest Moderator wrote:
>This kind of security "exploit" is tailor-made for the ever-shorter
>news cycle: a flash in the electronic pan perfectly timed to grab the
>(admittedly minute) imaginations of our nations' "reporters", [....]
In our household we have 4 users and their friends using from 4 to 8 computers
online. We use WEP encryption because it's the one which is most understood
by the majority of wireless cards. I know I've just committed a blasphemy or
something, but I monitor the connections and I have never seen anyone pirate
our wireless, or even attempt to do so. And our household is in a
neighborhood full of wireless users. There must be 8 or 10 routers visible at
any given time, and who knows how many that aren't broadcasting.
I do understand the worries about the WPA2 encryption problem. We don't have
much that anybody wants. If we operated a multi-billion dollar company or an
important government agency I'm sure that this is extremely important news.
***** Moderator's Note *****
David,
If you opperated an important government agency or a multi-billion
dollar company, I'm sure this would be extremely OLD news. Everyone
in the industry knows that wireless security is flawed: like the long
lines at airport "security" checkpoints, it's a compromise designed to
reassure the buying public that they can spend their dollars
online. What annoyed me was the timing of the announcement: a blatant
PR ploy to fill the empty seconds between commercials on your local TV
station's "news" broadcast.
If you use any wireless connection for non-trivial purposes, connect
via a well-tested VPN.
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:39:14 +0200
From: Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1002@zugschl.us>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: WPA2 vulnerability found
Message-ID: <i2ka73$r83$1@news1.tnib.de>
sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye) wrote:
>In our household we have 4 users and their friends using from 4 to 8
>computers online. We use WEP encryption because it's the one which
>is most understood by the majority of wireless cards. I know I've
>just committed a blasphemy or something, but I monitor the
>connections and I have never seen anyone pirate our wireless, or even
>attempt to do so.
Pirating your wireless is the lesser issue. Somebody snooping into
your internal communications is something you don't notice (can't
notice) and is the issue that you should be concerned about.
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 03:34:41 GMT
From: sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com (David Kaye)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <i2ivoh$4l1$2@news.eternal-september.org>
John Mayson <john@mayson.us> wrote:
>I agree. I remember hearing time and again how difficult 10-digit
>numbers would be on "our children" as if we were collectively rearing
>the nation's millions of children and these children were incapable of
>remembering anything longer than seven digits.
I know this sounds strange, but just now I realized that I don't know the
phone numbers of any of my friends except one, and that's because she says the
phone number on her voicemail. If not for hearing that message so often I
wouldn't remember it at all.
My phone's number list is automatically backed up once a week where it's
accessible via a website, and I download the list from the website every few
months.
But, gee, if I didn't have my phone with me or access to a computer I wouldn't
know how to reach anybody. I doubt if anybody I know is listed.
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 11:00:06 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <Mo-dnYleKqKaLNDRnZ2dnUVZ_tGdnZ2d@posted.visi>
David Kaye wrote:
>
> I know this sounds strange, but just now I realized that I don't know the
> phone numbers of any of my friends except one, and that's because she says the
> phone number on her voicemail.
I'm pretty much in the same boat. I rely on scrolling back in caller
ID to call people. If you're not one of the last 50 people who've
called me, you're out of luck.
I'd program the numbers into speed dial, but I've got 6 phones, and
they all program and speed dial differently (except for the one that
doesn't do it at all). I'd never remember how to call (or whether a
given number had even been programmed, since at least one phone has a
10-number memory).
I suppose telco speed dialing would solve that (except for my cell
phone), but I'm not going to pay six bucks a month for _that_.
Dave
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:03:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <7ffd2e00-028f-4511-9d9d-28705700e1b9@q12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
On Jul 24, 9:09 pm, David Clayton <dcs...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> Sometimes people just have to stop continually complaining and accept that
> there are actually experts in a particular field that are doing things for
> everyone's long-term interests.
Those of us who have more than our share of gray hair have seen too
many examples of so-called "experts" screwing things up for the rest
of us--and that certainly includes the telecom field. My "DANGER WILL
ROBINSON" lights go on the minute someone says "to serve you better",
or, "for your protection", or even, "New and improved".
To give one example involving telecom--who was the "expert" who
decided that repair service would no longer be reached by dialing 611,
and further, no longer reach a skilled craftsman at a test desk but
rather go to an untrained clerk hundreds of miles away (after
negotiating voice mail jail)?
The number of exchanges assigned to my town is ridiculous. There's no
way we could ever fill them up even if every person and all their pets
had a land line, cell phone, and fax machine. Indeed, the number of
land lines is going down as people abandon them for their cell
phones. (How many wealthy parents these days still maintain separate
land line phones for their kids? The kids have their own cell phones,
so there's no need for "teen" lines, which once was a popular option
in well-to-do areas.)
To avoid wasted numbers, I thought they were supposed to be able to
assign only portions of exchanges, not the full 10,000 numbers, But
apparently not. Plus the fact there's number portability, so someone
dumping the baby bell for the cable company will get their number; the
cable company doesn't need as many new numbers for it.
Date: 26 Jul 2010 15:07:16 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance and number assignment
Message-ID: <20100726150716.12953.qmail@joyce.lan>
>To give one example involving telecom--who was the "expert" who
>decided that repair service would no longer be reached by dialing 611,
>and further, no longer reach a skilled craftsman at a test desk but
>rather go to an untrained clerk hundreds of miles away (after
>negotiating voice mail jail)?
That wasn't an expert. That was an accountant, responding to the
incentives of rate cap rather than rate of return regulation.
>To avoid wasted numbers, I thought they were supposed to be able to
>assign only portions of exchanges, not the full 10,000 numbers, But
>apparently not.
Yes, of course they can. The vast numbers of underused prefixes were
assigned before suballocation worked, and they frequently suballocate
out of those prefixes now. For example, in Princeton NJ, 609-375-2XXX
and 609-375-9XXX are assigned to TCG, 609-375-5XXX through
609-375-7XXX are assigned to Omnipoint, and 609-375-8XXX to
bandwidth.com. 609-375-0XXX, 609-375-1XXX, 609-375-3XXX, and
609-375-4XXX are still available.
R's,
John
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:14:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <3bdbe3ec-69aa-4e02-a02a-a8edbb9be853@5g2000yqz.googlegroups.com>
On Jul 25, 12:31 pm, Steven <diespamm...@killspammers.com> wrote:
> What I have never understood is why the NPA did not just throw out the
> plan at the time and go to a European dialing plan, adding a digit to
> the AC and or another one to the exchange, to me it would have been no
> more trouble then having to reprogram the switches to handle 11 digits.
> After it was in place I don't thing new area codes would ever have to
> be placed into service.
There are a wide variety of local and toll telco switches out there,
so each type would require its own unique programming. Who would pay
for it?
Cell phones would need reprogramming. I suppose that could be
downloaded, but again, it must be programmed for all the different
phone types out there and someone's gotta pay for it.
Such a change would require a flash cutover. Given how commerce is
automated 24/7 now that would be a problem. In the old days of manual-
to-dial flash cutovers they'd do as much as possible in advance, but
just shut down the exchange from about 11:55 pm to 12:10 am (after
widespread publicity) and rush in the cutover. Today such an effort
would cause many business problems.
Indeed, going to eight digits would mean a massive effort for the
business community to reprogram their internal PBXs and automatic
dialing systems. It was a pain when they split an area code some
years ago, and more automated systems have come online.
Then of course there's business paperwork and other things, as well as
residential records.
In past major cutovers, such as 3L-4N to 2L-5N, many calls failed to
go through. You could expect several days of absolute chaos between
user errors and telco errors.
Contrast this to area code overlays. The 10 digit can be phased in
with a dual period. The new area code is for new numbers, so only a
few have it at first. It's far simpler.
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:37:41 +0200
From: Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1002@zugschl.us>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <i2ka45$r7r$1@news1.tnib.de>
Lisa or Jeff <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>Contrast this to area code overlays. The 10 digit can be phased in
>with a dual period. The new area code is for new numbers, so only a
>few have it at first. It's far simpler.
And how was a split handled? Half the people in the area got a new
area code but were able to keep their "old" seven-digit number? And
the other half didn't have a chance at all?
Greetings
Marc
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 18:48:31 +1000
From: David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <pan.2010.07.26.08.48.30.424219@myrealbox.com>
On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:43:03 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>>Back in the 1990's in Australia the whole numbering plan was rationalised
>>to a standard 2 digit area code + 8 digit local area number (for
>>"Geographic numbers")
>
> Old numbers were preserved or not?
The vast majority of people had one extra digit added to the start of
their existing 7 digit number, those few with shorter old numbers had
a few more added to get them to the standard 8 digit local number.
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:36:10 +0200
From: Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam1002@zugschl.us>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <i2ka1a$r7l$1@news1.tnib.de>
David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 25 Jul 2010 17:43:03 +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> David Clayton <dcstar@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>>>Back in the 1990's in Australia the whole numbering plan was rationalised
>>>to a standard 2 digit area code + 8 digit local area number (for
>>>"Geographic numbers")
>>
>> Old numbers were preserved or not?
>
>The vast majority of people had one extra digit added to the start of
>their existing 7 digit number, those few with shorter old numbers had
>a few more added to get them to the standard 8 digit local number.
Europe[1] does it differently. Shorter numbers are allowed here, and
the exchanges are equipped to handle them. This used to be an
advantage, giving us more flexibility[2], and is a disadvantage now,
since VoIP equipment needs to employ a time out to find out when the
user has finished dialing.
Greetings
Marc
[1] or better, Germany, I don't know enough about other countries
[2] when our numbers became a scarce resource in the 80ies, telcos
just started issueing new numbers with one digit more, and for each
old number that went out of service due to the customer moving or
canceling, ten new numbers became available
--
-------------------------------------- !! No courtesy copies, please !! -----
Marc Haber | " Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header
Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom " | http://www.zugschlus.de/
Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG "Rightful Heir" | Fon: *49 621 72739834
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:00:36 -0700
From: Sam Spade <sam@coldmail.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <tdSdnYWN1PoJjtPRnZ2dnUVZ_jCdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Marc Haber wrote:
> Europe[1] does it differently. Shorter numbers are allowed here, and
> the exchanges are equipped to handle them. This used to be an
> advantage, giving us more flexibility[2], and is a disadvantage now,
> since VoIP equipment needs to employ a time out to find out when the
> user has finished dialing.
Usually the # key will end the timing.
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:34:21 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: The plan: westward the Net
Message-ID: <p0624086ec8734ca5daf2@[10.5.11.42]>
The plan: westward the Net
$71.6m project carries local boost
By John Dyer, Globe Correspondent | July 18, 2010
The Boston Globe
A $71.6 million plan by the White House and Beacon Hill to expand
broadband Internet access in Western Massachusetts is a shot in the
arm for the Westborough-based Massachusetts Technology Collaborative
and the region's high-tech industry, officials said.
In addition to putting the collaborative in charge of stringing 1,100
miles of fiber-optic cable in 123 communities between Worcester and
the New York state line over the next three years, the plan could
cement or boost much of the growth in the technology firms along
Interstate 495 that has occurred in recent years, officials added.
...
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/07/18/716m_plan_aims_to_extend_broadband_west/
***** Moderator's Note *****
Why are communities in Eastern Massachusetts less deserving of federal
aid than those in the western part of the state?
Bill Horne
Moderator
Date: 26 Jul 2010 14:56:00 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <20100726145600.10230.qmail@joyce.lan>
>Despite leaving Atlanta in 1992 I have continued to have strong
>personal ties to the area. There was a some anxiety over the 404/770
>split in 1995 and the fact 10-digit dialing would be mandatory. My
>idea was to have phone numbers go to this format:
>
>+1 (40) 4555-1212
>+1 (77) 0555-1212
>
>Within the metro area people would dial 8 digits while those outside
>would continue to dial the area as they always have before. Of course
>such a plan would NEVER have flown, but it's certainly an idea. Isn't
>this more or less how it works in Europe, phone number length can
>vary?
Yes, it's how it works in Europe. It's not how it works here. North
American phone systems use what's called "en bloc" signalling, in
which a fixed ten digit phone number is sent all at once. European
phone systems use "compelled" signalling which can interpret digits
one at a time. Back in the 1940s and 1950s when long distance dialing
was new, en bloc signalling had huge advantages in North America,
where the whole network was under one management, since the switches
of the time could back up and try a different route if one route was
blocked, while compelled couldn't. These days all the switches are
computers which can do any routing trick you want, but the signalling
systems are embedded in every switch, and ten digit numbers are
embedded in vast numbers of memory phones, PBXes, and who knows what
else. The cost of changing is so high that it'll only happen once,
when we run out of ten digit numbers and expand everything to 12
digits.
It's worth noting that in Europe the trend has been to fixed length
numbers. Every number in France is 9 digits, a one digit region code
and an eight digit local number, or a nine digit number starting with
6 for mobiles. You dial 0+9d for everything. (Replace the zero with
a different digit to pick a different carrier.) In the UK, nearly all
numbers are ten digits, with the split being 2+8, 3+7, or 4+6 for
landlines, and just a 10 digit number starting with 7 for mobiles.
Germany still has numbers of highly variable length, and seems to like
it that way, so their compelled signalling isn't going away, either.
R's,
John
***** Moderator's Note *****
"Back in the 1940s and 1950s ... the switches of the time could back up
and try a different route if one route was blocked ..."
AFAIK, neither the switches available then nor the swiches in use now
are able to "back up" when a route is blocked; it's just not a
capability that Ma Bell chose, or chooses, to pay for. Once office "A"
decides on a route for a call and sends call signalling to the chosen
office "B", control passes to office B. The only option for the office
B is to complete the call, pass it along to office "C", or fail the
call. There is no provision for backing up at any point: office "A"
never gets a "try again" message from office B or anyplace else.
The closest thing to a "back up" feature is the capability of
SS7-equipped offices to supply local busy tone to the originating
subscriber on a failed (busy) attempt, but office A never tries to
re-initiate call routing via a different trunk group on any failed
call attempt.
Bill Horne
Moderator
P.S. I have not included features such as camp-on-busy, since they do
not involve a retry of a call attempt which has failed.
Date: 26 Jul 2010 22:43:21 -0000
From: John Levine <johnl@iecc.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Overlay acceptance
Message-ID: <20100726224321.6665.qmail@joyce.lan>
>AFAIK, neither the switches available then nor the swiches in use now
>are able to "back up" when a route is blocked; it's just not a
>capability that Ma Bell chose, or chooses, to pay for.
Sorry, I should have said a switch can try multiple routes if the
preferred route isn't available, the 4XB had some thing that shuffled
punchcards to try routes, and had some ability to customize by time of
day. I can't dig it up now, but I've read stuff about e.g. routing
calls in the morning from Chicago to New York via Denver and Dallas
since it's earlier in Denver so it's not as busy yet.
Compelled signalling assumed SxS style incremental decoding and
routing, which was fine in Europe where the countries were small and
the number of tandem routes, and particular routes between countries
was also small.
R's,
John
Date: 26 Jul 2010 12:39:05 -0400
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Is Broadcast TV about to be killed?
Message-ID: <i2kdn9$8cl$1@panix2.panix.com>
David Kaye <sfdavidkaye2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>I'm getting a little tired of hearing old-school people whine about how
>something should be preserved when the evidence is that the world is moving
>away from their obsolete technology. And I'm no 20-something. I grew up in a
>world where AM radio was king. But that was then and this is now.
If an argument is made that a new service will actually provide more benefit
to the public than an old service did, then I am for it.
However, since the Reagan administration changes, the FCC has looked almost
entirely about whether a new service will provide more financial benefit to
the FCC, rather than whether it will benefit the public.
As a consequence, many people, myself among them, become very very suspicious
when the FCC begins talking about shutting down old services and allocating
their bandwidth to new ones. We demand somewhat stronger arguments than might
otherwise be necessary.
Folks who recall things like big chunks of the 220 MHz ham radio band being
sold off to UPS, who then decided not to use it, might be very suspicious of
the actual benefit to the public of new services.
Right now there is a huge demand for bandwidth for wireless data services,
but if you look at the actual demand and the amount of bandwidth actually
in the spectrum, there's a huge disconnect. You could shut down all broadcast
TV and move all the channels over to wireless services and it would hardly
begin to fill the demand. Consequently I am not sure that doing this is
really the solution. I'm not sure I know what the solution is, mind you.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Date: 26 Jul 2010 12:43:29 -0400
From: kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey)
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Apple: iPut a rubber band on it
Message-ID: <i2kdvh$1f8$1@panix2.panix.com>
In article <52078.1279932795@people.net.au>, <colins@people.net.au> wrote:
>Users of Apple's new iPhone 4 have reported that the phone loses
>reception when you hold it a certain way. Attempts to quantify the
>extent of the defect have only fueled the controversy. So how do you
>test a cellphone antenna? Do you really need an anechoic chamber, like
>one of the 17 Apple reportedly owns?
Yes, but being anechoic at cellphone frequencies isn't particularly difficult
to expensive to arrange. It's much easier than at lower frequencies.
>What's wrong with testing the phone in a radio-frequency isolation
>chamber, as Consumer Reports did?
You get reflections off the walls and off of objects inside the room,
which makes it very difficult to measure actual signal strengths because you
are forced to separate the original pulse from the reflections. Easier to
do in a big faraday cage than a small one, but generally a pain especially
if you want to actually measure the radiation pattern rather than just get
radiation in one direction.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 07:02:42 -0400
From: Randall <rvh40.remove-this@and-this-too.insightbb.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: WPA2 vulnerability found
Message-ID: <89A81498-9D37-43BE-97A3-4D517E8D1283@insightbb.com>
>http://www.networkworld.com/newsletters/wireless/
2010/072610wireless1.html
>***** Moderator's Note *****
>This kind of security "exploit" is tailor-made for the ever-shorter
>news cycle: a flash in the electronic pan perfectly timed to grab the
>(admittedly minute) imaginations of our nations' "reporters", and just
>awesome fer-shur as a "tease" for the evening news: a helping hand
>extended to the lizardlike programming directors of our
>information-spigot-spinners after Washington's spin-masters have
>called it quits for the weekend.
>News flash: if it's in the docs, it's NOT an exploit.
Ah, but there are lots of people who subscribe to WISPs - could they
not (theoretically) snoop each other's web traffic?
While I'm near the subject, something I've wondered since I got my
iPhone: How secure is my login information if I use my iPhone's 3G
connection to log into a bank account?
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:59:37 -0400
From: Monty Solomon <monty@roscom.com>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: EFF Wins New Legal Protections for Video Artists, Cell Phone Jailbreakers, and Unlockers
Message-ID: <p06240897c873b54b834b@[10.5.11.42]>
EFF Wins New Legal Protections for Video Artists, Cell Phone
Jailbreakers, and Unlockers
Rulemaking Fixes Critical DMCA Wrongs
July 26, 2010
San Francisco - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) won three
critical exemptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)
anticircumvention provisions today, carving out new legal protections
for consumers who modify their cell phones and artists who remix
videos - people who, until now, could have been sued for their
non-infringing or fair use activities.
"By granting all of EFF's applications, the Copyright Office and
Librarian of Congress have taken three important steps today to
mitigate some of the harms caused by the DMCA," said Jennifer
Granick, EFF's Civil Liberties Director. "We are thrilled to have
helped free jailbreakers, unlockers and vidders from this law's
overbroad reach."
The exemptions were granted as part of a statutorily prescribed
rulemaking process, conducted every three years to mitigate the
danger the DMCA poses to legitimate, non-infringing uses of
copyrighted materials. The DMCA prohibits "circumventing" digital
rights management (DRM) and "other technical protection measures"
used to control access to copyrighted works. While the DMCA still
chills competition, free speech, and fair use, today's exemptions
take unprecedented new strides towards protecting more consumers and
artists from its extensive reach.
The first of EFF's three successful requests clarifies the legality
of cell phone "jailbreaking" - software modifications that liberate
iPhones and other handsets to run applications from sources other
than those approved by the phone maker. More than a million iPhone
owners are said to have "jailbroken" their handsets in order to
change wireless providers or use applications obtained from sources
other than Apple's own iTunes "App Store," and many more have
expressed a desire to do so. But the threat of DMCA liability had
previously endangered these customers and alternate applications
stores.
In its reasoning in favor of EFF's jailbreaking exemption, the
Copyright Office rejected Apple's claim that copyright law prevents
people from installing unapproved programs on iPhones: "When one
jailbreaks a smartphone in order to make the operating system on that
phone interoperable with an independently created application that
has not been approved by the maker of the smartphone or the maker of
its operating system, the modifications that are made purely for the
purpose of such interoperability are fair uses."
...
https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2010/07/26
For the full rulemaking order:
https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/dmca_2009/RM-2008-8.pdf
For more on the DMCA rulemaking:
https://www.eff.org/issues/dmca-rulemaking
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 00:41:05 +0200
From: Tor-Einar Jarnbjo <news@jarnbjo.de>
To: telecomdigestmoderator.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Paul Rosen, 88, helped develop the high-speed modem
Message-ID: <8b6h8aFlgaU1@mid.individual.net>
Lisa or Jeff schrieb:
> Could someone explain in layman's terms what exactly his invention
> did? I checked the article but it didn't say. It mentioned that the
> Bell System was able to make minor changes and utilize his invention
> without royalty.
The patent (2,850,573) covers the actual circuit design and not just the
modulation theory of a modulator and demodulator able to reach bit rates
close to the carrier frequency. Some parameters are variable, but with
the example configuration in the patent, the circuits reaches 1600 bps
using a 2 kHz amplitude modulated carrier.
Tor
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit, mostly non-commercial educational
service offered to the Internet by Bill Horne. All the contents
of the Digest are compilation-copyrighted. You may reprint articles in
some other media on an occasional basis, but please attribute my work
and that of the original author.
The Telecom Digest is moderated by Bill Horne.
Contact information: Bill Horne
Telecom Digest
43 Deerfield Road
Sharon MA 02067-2301
781-784-7287
bill at horne dot net
Subscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=subscribe telecom
Unsubscribe: telecom-request@telecom-digest.org?body=unsubscribe telecom
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright (C) 2009 TELECOM Digest. All rights reserved.
Our attorney is Bill Levant, of Blue Bell, PA.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help
is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of fifty dollars
per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above.
Please make at least a single donation to cover the cost of processing
your name to the mailing list.
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
End of The Telecom Digest (19 messages)
|
| |
or 